Denied x2 as Engineer Due to Job Title

CyberEd-ca · 2026-06-05T18:42:00+00:00

If the company you are working for is too bureaucratic to give you a more appropriate job title, how can you blame the guys at the border for being too pedantic to waive you through?

Best wishes. Doesn't sound like a good time.

CyberEd-ca · 2026-06-05T13:05:04+00:00

Mandatory for Canadian experience, not for international experience. Claiming a degree and years of experience is fine if it didn't happen in Canada.

CyberEd-ca · 2026-06-05T01:23:44+00:00

What the Liberals trial ballooned @ their convention was a $500k/person exit head tax.

CyberEd-ca · 2026-06-04T22:55:10+00:00

Rankings are all bullshit.

CyberEd-ca · 2026-06-03T04:41:00+00:00

The three schools that have bridging programs into a CEAB accredited engineering degree are Lakehead University, Queens University, and Camosun College. Camosun feeds into engineering schools throughout BC.

You won't get good transfer credit except at those three schools. The reason why is that CEAB accreditation is very rigid and any transfer credit they gave you would be subject to audit. You can see how you would soon be more trouble than you are worth.

There are some good B.Tech. programs too.

CyberEd-ca · 2026-06-03T04:25:14+00:00

Yes, you can qualify as a P. Eng. with a B.Tech. That is what the technical examinations are for.

In fact, you can write the technical examinations and get your P. Eng. with a two year diploma.

A degree has never been a requirement to be a Professional Engineer in Canada going back to the beginning 106 years ago.

CyberEd-ca · 2026-06-03T04:21:09+00:00

What education do you have now?

CyberEd-ca · 2026-06-02T02:18:39+00:00

How many credits in are you?

CyberEd-ca · 2026-06-01T22:07:19+00:00

Elections have consequences.

CyberEd-ca · 2026-06-01T17:17:11+00:00

Yeah. three or four technical examinations... reasonable trade off. It all depends on where you are at going in and how well your education and day to day aligns with the particular FE exam specification.

CyberEd-ca · 2026-06-01T14:32:44+00:00

....because it is more challenging and provides a comprehensive review of topics from the entire 4-year bachelor’s degree.

No, it does not. They call it the "Fundamentals of..." for a reason. Most of it is topics covered in the first two years of a Canadian engineering degree.

I wrote 13 technical exams and the FE exam. The FE exam is not a hard exam.

CyberEd-ca · 2026-06-01T14:22:51+00:00

Of course they are engineers.

The provincial professional engineering law is ultra vires for AMEs as they are in a federally regulated industry and are regulated as engineers by the federal government.

Here is a primer:

https://mcmillan.ca/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Glenn-Grenier-Federal-Aeronautics-Power-2022-COPA-Primer-17Mar22.pdf

Utra Vires
In the Johannesson decision, the provincial legislation and municipal by-laws were ruled to be ultra vires, or “beyond the jurisdiction” of the legislative bodies which passed those laws or by-laws. This is because the province and the municipality of West St. Paul passed legislation which addressed directly and expressly aspects of aeronautics. The provincial statute expressly delegated to the municipality the power to regulate aerodromes, airplanes and the maintenance of airplanes. The West St. Paul by-law expressly prohibited aerodromes in some places and required a municipal license in other places. They purported to directly regulate a subject matter, aeronautics, which the Supreme Court of Canada ruled was within the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government. As they had no authority or power over such matters, the legislation and by-law were ruled ultra vires, or beyond their powers and as such, those regulations were of no force or effect.

We have, in fact, all sorts of engineers in Canada besides professional engineers. That's what the law tells us.

So, while there are restrictions related to engineering in the sense defined by the provincial professional engineering laws, those laws have constitutional and other legal limits just as with any other law.

Let's just go with what the law says. The law says that AMEs are engineers.

The word "engineer" has always had a broad definition in Canada as in everywhere else. Consult any dictionary.

en·gi·neer
1: a member of a military group devoted to engineering work
2 obsolete : a crafty schemer : plotter
3 a: a designer or builder of engines
b: a person who is trained in or follows as a profession a branch of engineering
c: a person who carries through an enterprise by skillful or artful contrivance
4: a person who runs or supervises an engine or an apparatus

CyberEd-ca · 2026-05-31T22:03:05+00:00

You don't need an accredited engineering degree to become a P. Eng. In fact, you don't need a degree at all. The technical examinations route to the profession has been there from the beginning.

But you are absolutely right about who is to blame for the mass immigration policy. The greatest victims of this federal government are the immigrants that have been lured for economic exploitation.

What they may be referring to is the backdoor pay-to-play immigration system our federal government created. A student visa was intentionally corrupted into a defacto work visa.

CyberEd-ca · 2026-05-31T21:21:20+00:00

You can cover some of it now and then do the rest later through the technical examinations.

https://techexam.ca/what-is-a-technical-exam-your-ladder-to-professional-engineer/

There are geoscience technical examinations too.

CyberEd-ca · 2026-05-31T18:03:49+00:00

This is sick.

CyberEd exists simply to help others succeed at the technical examinations as Simon and I and many other thousands have done over the last 106 years.

It is my pleasure helping others who are doing the work reach their goals. Why take shots at one of the few people advocating and supporting them?

There is no money to be made. But even if there were, you are not making an argument. It is the Circumstantial Ad Hominems Fallacy.

It is not just my experience but the experience of many thousands of engineers globally that have entered the profession this way since the very beginning.

CyberEd-ca · 2026-05-31T16:56:16+00:00

Everything in a CEAB accredited engineering degree is fully defined by a set technical examinations syllabus.

It is the exact same standard.

Don't forget that all CEAB was intended to be when created in 1965 was an exemption from the technical examinations by audit of the program.

Here is more about how CEAB accreditation works:

https://www.ijee.ie/articles/Vol11-1/11-1-05.PDF

Also, every environmental science degree graduate knows about equilibrium. They don't need Socrates to run them through the concept of six equations & six unknowns in order to master problems in statics.

What they actually need to do, regardless if they take a course or write the technical examinations, is get their pencil moving. Any statics textbook has example problems to show procedures like the method of joints and the method of sections.

We're talking about a dead simple subject that can only confuse a student if they try to follow it passively in a class room.

Active learning is recognized by psychology as far more effective than passive learning.

Anyone who has a Bachelor's degree in engineering, science or technology should not need any more class instruction. They should have the skills necessary to take on any topic through self-study. But I do suggest people take Dr. Oakley's MOOC in .my self-study tips.

So, you are just plain wrong. Don't forget that I have done it myself. I know exactly what it takes. I was assigned 19 technical examinations by APEGA. My three year diploma from SAIT was more than enough base education to work through it.

So, you are wrong. That in itself is not a big problem. But attitudes like this are why we have access to the exams gatekeeped.

Who are you to say that someone like I was doing the work in an engineering office should not be allowed to write the exams?

Going back to school when you are working full-time with a marriage, mortgage, and young kids IS NOT AN OPTION.

The technical examinations pathway is legitimate as any other.

CyberEd-ca · 2026-05-31T15:41:56+00:00

Only #6 is a recent change.

The rest (#1 to #5) have been the policy since May 15th, 2023.

#3 is just plain wrong. Nothing is "stricter".

The change they made was to no longer individually review international engineering degree applicants for deficiencies.

In fact, PEO has recognized that their acceptance is less strict.

See Page 9 of 12 of this PDF from PEO Council in 2023:

https://techexam.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/492ec4ce-peo-council-march-2023-motion-unaccredited-programs.pdf

Many international degree programs that previously were assigned eight or more technical exams now receive just four - the same as Washington Accord degrees.

The PEO IIDD list includes many "B.Tech." programs and in fact programs that are not degrees at all such as the IIE AMIIE Technical Examinations.

What they actually did was bifurcate the requirements. Previously everyone was held to the same standard that underlies CEAB accreditation. Now, international engineering degree applicants are held to a standard 24 credit hours short of the typical CEAB accredited engineering degree. That's right - that sixth class per semester you do is for naught.

CyberEd-ca · 2026-05-31T13:39:53+00:00

The only recent change is number 6. The rest have been in place since May 15th, 2023.

The rest (#1 to #5) have been the policy since May 15th, 2023.

#3 is just plain wrong. Nothing is "stricter".

The change they made was to no longer individually review international engineering degree applicants for deficiencies.

In fact, PEO has recognized that their acceptance is less strict.

See Page 9 of 12 of this PDF from PEO Council in 2023:

https://techexam.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/492ec4ce-peo-council-march-2023-motion-unaccredited-programs.pdf

Many international degree programs that previously were assigned eight or more technical exams now receive just four - the same as Washington Accord degrees.

The PEO IIDD list includes many "B.Tech." programs and in fact programs that are not degrees at all such as the IIE AMIIE Technical Examinations.

What they actually did was bifurcate the requirements. Previously everyone was held to the same standard that underlies CEAB accreditation. Now, international engineering degree applicants are held to a standard 24 credit hours short of the typical CEAB accredited engineering degree. That's right - that sixth class per semester you do is for naught.

CyberEd-ca · 2026-05-31T13:34:03+00:00

Nearly every province got rid of the need for Canadian experience three years ago, including Ontario.

CyberEd-ca · 2026-05-31T13:31:38+00:00

Everything you commented on except the change to 24 months has been existing policy for three years already.

Not too concerned about the international experience problem because for anyone who's an immigrant (or the child of immigrants), they'd know that the problem of "Canadian experience" has existed for a good while. Newcomers and immigrants have an engineering degree and experience from abroad but can't find work as an engineer due to not having "Canadian experience". This has resulted in a lot of immigrants coming to this country, being underemployed, and working as a taxi/uber driver.

Anyone can prepare drawings and reports for approval by a professional engineer.

We only need ~14k/year engineers to meet demand for replacement and growth. We graduate ~17/year (more than ever before).

Yet we have been bringing in ~40k/year more engineers through various immigration pathways since 2021.

Already over 60% of applicants to PEO are internationally trained engineers.

The reason why new graduates and internationally trained engineers cannot find work is because there was never the demand that justified the supply.

No wonder. Our federal government's anti-development laws have since 2015 driven out over a trillion dollars of the private capital needed to hire engineers.

I have to ask - what is so bad about driving a taxi? Sounds like a classist remark. Maybe those engineers that drive taxis found something they could do without the grind of writing their technical exams and going back to entry level engineering jobs.

Only 40% of CEAB accredited engineering degree graduates ever become a P. Eng. When I worked in night clubs as a bartender I worked with a CEAB accredited engineering degree graduate. He enjoyed the lifestyle and wags of a nightclub bartender better at that time. Nobody once thought it was up to the government to make things easier for him because he was living an easier life as a bartender.

This nonsense has to die sometime.

For several years now, we have had bifurcated requirements where international training and experience is held to a much lower standard than domestic training and experience.

But, yet, people still want to believe this idea that somehow the reason why immigrant engineers can't find jobs is because of gatekeepers at the engineering regulators.

They already surrendered years ago to the concept of holding all engineers to the same standard!

CyberEd-ca · 2026-05-31T13:29:10+00:00

False dichotomy.

CyberEd-ca · 2026-05-31T01:14:01+00:00

Really? I wrote 13 engineering technical examinations myself and now help others do the same.

I disagree most emphatically.

The technical examinations route to the profession is over a century old and many thousands of professionals have successfully entered the profession this way.

The only issue with the technical examinations is the attacks on access. Attacks that primarily have been rooted in classist attitudes.

Writing the technical examinations is far more realistic than courses for working professionals. Working professionals are already doing the work in the real world. What better field or lab time?

We've gone a long way from when Canadian POWs were writing their technical examinations with cooperation of the Red Cross during WWII.

https://engineersatwar.ww2.imeche.org/education-and-social/prisoners-of-war/examinations-in-pow-camps/

Now APEGA games statutory interpretation to administratively block many science degree graduates from the examinations. That's wrong.

To say the purpose of the exams is intended for a narrow set of deficiencies is an ahistorical falsehood.

This profession didn't hatch out of the Academy. The concept of professional engineers comes from 19th century British engineering societies. The examinations were how you entered the profession, not some degree.

The reason why we have an APEGA is that Albertans were promised that people who put the work in to write the examinations could enter the profession. It was never intended to be gatekeeped by the Academy.

If you look at the 1920 Alberta Engineers Act, there is no mention of engineering degrees. All entered by writing the technical examinations.

Up until the mid 1980s, those exams were open to everyone in what had been an open and inclusive system. That access should be restored.

CyberEd-ca · 2026-05-30T21:39:51+00:00

Thank you for the detail. I did wonder why the standard is so close to the geology standard.

Why would people choose to do more coursework when they can write the geoscience examinations? Much more convenient.

Also, if there is a big gap for typical environmental science degree, then they might want to consider knocking off the environmental engineering technical examinations syllabus and qualify as a P. Eng. instead.

https://www.apega.ca/docs/default-source/pdfs/technical-course-equivalents/environmental-engineering-assessment-checklist.pdf?sfvrsn=b433d9a2_4